Colonel Olcott stayed with me during the short time that he was at Dacca. His
mode of living was quite as simple as that of Madame Blavatsky. He possessed to a
large extent the magnetic healing power, and treated successfully several patients by
making passes. His kind and sympathetic disposition was admired by all those that
came in contact with him. On looking at my library, he said he was greatly struck by
the absence of books on religion, psychology, or spirituality, though there were many on
mathematics, physics, and other natural sciences. I made no secret of my scepticism
and materialism. I told him that I did not believe in any spiritual substance apart
from the material.

The fact is that I was quite saturated with the teachings of Huxley, Spencer, and
Tyndall, and could not believe in the existence of anything that was not capable of being
experimented upon by scientists. With such an attitude of mind, I did not benefit
more by the presence of Colonel Olcott than I had done by that of Madame Blavatsky.
I, however, worked for the establishment of the branch Theosophical Society in the same
way as I would have done had I been a sincere believer. The Dacca Branch Society was
duly opened by Colonel Olcott, and its office-bearers were elected. As I had taken
the principal part in its organisation, I was asked to be one of the office-bearers.
But I thought that by thus identifying myself with Theosophy, I should be compromising my
position as a student of science, so I excused myself of the honour on the ground that the
state of my health, and the nature of my duties, compelled me to remain away from Dacca
for the greater part of the year, which also was true.

During his short stay at Dacca, Colonel Olcott delivered a lecture, one evening, in the
Town Hall, in which he praised the Aryan Rishis of old, and advocated the more general
study of Sanskrit. But the same spirit of hostility towards the Rishis and their
teachings which had induced me to deliver, at Darjeeling, in 1881, a counterlecture in
answer to Babu Protap Chunder Mozoomdar, roused me up again, and at the conclusion of
Colonel Olcott's address I said all manner of things against the ancient Hindus. I
attributed our present degraded condition to the too great importance they attached to the
spiritual side at the expense of the material. The study of the Sanskrit language
and literature, which had such charms for Sir William Jones, T. Colebrooke, Max Muller,
and others, meant to me a mere waste of time. Sanskrit, I argued, was a dead
language, and contained none of the sciences and arts which had contributed to the
greatness of the Europeans, and so it deserved no revival. My remarks wounded the
feelings of the audience, who were mostly Hindus, and must have also wounded those of
Colonel Olcott, though he was far too good to betray any sign of being hurt. He was
too noble to take offence at my rudeness and want of patriotic feelings.

On the evening following Colonel Olcott's departure from Dacca, I lay on a couch
contemplating about the Theosophical movement. In the course of this contemplation,
I gradually fell into a sort of calm and passive state of mind, when to my utter surprise
and bewilderment, I saw, with my closed eyes, appearing from either side of me, two
persons --one of whom had a long grey beard, wore white flowing robes, and a turban like a
respectable Brahmin of Upper India, while the other was a young man dressed in white dhoti
and shirt like an ordinary Hindu gentleman. They said, "We are with
you." No sooner I heard these words, than the active state of my mind returned,
and the figures vanished. I did not, before that time, believe in spiritual eyes or
ears, but what I had seen and heard that evening were not through any physical
organs. The two persons who thus appeared were quite strangers to me. It was
after some time that I recognised, from a photograph, the younger gentleman to have been
Damodar Mavalankar, a Madrasee, who was a highly-advanced Chella (disciple) of
the Mahatmas. A photograph of Colonel Olcott's Guru (Master), which I
subsequently saw, bore some resemblance to the elder gentleman. But the resemblance
was not complete, and I am up to this day quite ignorant as to who my other visitor was.

The subjective effect of the above vision was most remarkable. I could not get
over the fact that I had, through other than physical ears and eyes, both heard and seen
the persons who appeared before me, and who were quite strangers to me, and the vision
could not have been a creation of my imagination. There must exist spiritual
counterparts of the physical organs, and my visitors must have possessed the power of
appearing in spiritual bodies at a distance from their physical bodies, and of
communicating spiritually. I was not given to seeing visions, and this was the first
of its kind. Under these circumstances, I could not help believing that there were
persons who were capable of manifesting themselves, and of communicating
spiritually. I also came to believe that there was a spiritual counterpart of our
material body. But I kept this belief within myself. I spoke about the vision
to several of my friends at the time it occurred, amongst whom was Babu Dinanath
Sen. I also spoke subsequently to Babu Chhatra Dhar Ghose and others at
Darjeeling. Two years after, I spoke about it to Colonel Olcott when he came up to
that place. I never made any mention of it in my letters to Madame Blavatsky,
fearing lest she should make out a strong case in favour of the occult powers alleged to
be possessed by the adepts from this incident. Madame Blavatsky had left India when
Colonel Olcott showed me the photographs referred to above, on my telling him of the
vision.

My attitude towards the Theosophical Society was at this time that of a calm and
earnest inquirer. In fact I was, for the time being, more a believer than a sceptic;
but the new light was too dazzling for eyes just emerged from the darkness of materialism,
and so at times I thought I should have further evidence before I avowed my firm belief in
the spiritual truths taught by Theosophy. At last I came to the conclusion that the
best thing to do would be to pay a visit to the headquarters of the Theosophical Society
at Adyar, Madras. I then wrote to Madame Blavatsky, intimating my intention to be
present at the next anniversary of the Society, provided she undertook to give some
further phenomenal evidence of the existence of the Mahatmas. Her reply was as
follows:

"MADRAS, ADYAR, November 7, 1883.

"My Dear Brother, --I have just returned from Bombay, and therefore just had your
letter, to which I answer.

I am glad to find you in such a state of mind, but how can I assure you of that which
it is not in my power to accomplish? All I can say to you is, no one, no
Theosophist who ever came here, went away without having had some phenomenal proof or
other of the existence of the Mahatmas. Whether, after having had such proofs,
you will be convinced or not, is not in my power to vouch for; all I know is that he who
does not believe (and I know of no such case) after seeing what takes place here, must be
wrong in his brains. And I am too well acquainted with your Europeanised and
Anglicised remarkable intellect, to have any such fear. But perhaps after
all, your scepticism will be proof even against facts. I hope not. At any rate
come. I do most sincerely beg of you to come and pass with us a week or two.
Only this can cure you of your congenital scepticism and soul-blindness. I had an
affection for you from the first and I do feel a regard for your future moral
welfare. I hope to cure and to convince you. Therefore come and try. Au
revoir. My love to Kanti Babu.

Yours,
H.P. BLAVATSKY."

In the end, however, I did not carry out the intention of paying a visit to
Madras. I thought I had had enough evidence of occultism in the shape of astral
bells, and of letters precipitated through the air, while Madame Blavatsky was at
Darjeeling; and after that, I had seen Mahatmas in the vision experienced at Dacca,
independent of H.P.B. If all these would not convince me, nothing else would.
It was not for want of evidence that I had not become a believer in the Mahatmas, but the
evidences were too wonderful to be believed in as real. While, therefore, I waited
with a longing heart for more and more light, I gave up the idea of going to Madras.
I feared I should be apt to consider as acts of trickery on the part of Madame Blavatsky
any phenomena witnessed in her house. I wanted independent evidence. This was
furnished when I was in a state of trance. I often felt that the Mahatmas were
present with me giving instructions. The beginning of these trances was involved in
sleep, but after that, the state of sleep vanished. I then felt quite conscious that
I was not dreaming, but was awake, and that what I was experiencing was not in dream, but
in a working state. I had to lie down in a passive condition as long as the Mahatma
remained present. I could not open my eyes so long as he was with me. But no
sooner he disappeared than the eyes opened of themselves. This kind of trance I have
also now, and I shall refer to this subject again later on.

In 1884, when Madame Blavatsky was in England, her former servants, the Coulombs, were
gained over by her Christian enemies, and they bore testimony as to her having associated
them with her in practising frauds on Theosophists. This led the London Psychical
Research Society to depute one of their members, Mr. Hodgson, to investigate the
matter. His report went against Madame Blavatsky, who was called, in the proceedings
of the Society, the greatest of impostors. In my then state of mind, which still
continued to reverence whatever came in the name of science, the decision of the Psychical
Research Society seemed to be conclusive, and, without judging the case calmly and
dispassionately, I joined the rank of H.P.B.'s calumniators. I cut off
correspondence with her, and spoke disparagingly both of her and Colonel Olcott to the
Theosophists and others.

Madame Blavatsky had left India, and so she might have been ignorant of what I had said
against her. Colonel Olcott learnt all about it from the Darjeeling Theosophists
when he came there in 1885. But the news did not produce the slightest change in his
attitude towards me, though he expressed a regret that I did not make any difference in
his case, as the delegate of the Psychical Research Society, while finding Madame
Blavatsky guilty of fraud, had absolved Colonel Olcott of all complicity in the
matter. In the face of this, I could not but plead guilty, and apologised, though
that was hardly necessary, as the nobility of Colonel Olcott's character was such as knew
not what it was to take offence.

During his short stay at Darjeeling, Colonel Olcott delivered a lecture on the
"Soul," at which, by his desire, I occupied the chair. Whatever belief in
a spiritual world had been produced in me by the vision and trance communications
described above, it disappeared after the so-called Coulomb exposure, which left me again
as great a sceptic as ever. Though Madame Blavatsky could not possibly have had any
near or remote connection with that vision and the trances as they occurred independently
of her, with the loss of my belief in her, I also lost all belief in Spiritual
things. When, therefore, at the end of Colonel Olcott's lecture, I had to speak a
few concluding words, I wound up by expressing a disbelief in the existence of
"Soul." To this circumstance Colonel Olcott refers in a letter dated 15th
December, 1894, in reply to one I wrote him after experiencing a most remarkable
vision. He writes:

"ADYAR, MADRAS, November 15, 1894.

"My Dear Parbati Bhai, -- So you have a Soul after all and if I had you
again for chairman at a Darjeeling lecture, I should have to retract my remark to the
effect that you had not! . . .

Yours affectionately,
H.S. OLCOTT."

As has already been said, I went to England in the spring of 1888. Madame
Blavatsky was then in London. After the remarks I had made as to her practising
deception, I was ashamed to see her, especially as, on maturer consideration, I had come
to the conclusion that she was innocent, and that the attacks made against her were the
result of envy and malice. I thought thus: if she had practised deception, she
would not have left any criminating evidence in the hands of the Coulombs, or in the house
occupied by her. She was far too intelligent to have managed her affairs in such a
clumsy manner, and as she did not require the help of the Coulombs when the phenomena
described in the Occult World took place, nor at those occurring at Darjeeling,
it is evident that the Coulombs were not indispensable to her. Again, the delegate
of the Psychical Research Society absolved Colonel Olcott of all complicity with Madame
Blavatsky in the deceptions practised by her. But as Colonel Olcott was identified
with her in all her professions regarding the Mahatmas, it would amount to saying that he
was wanting in even the barest common sense, and that he too had been deceived. This
theory none would admit who have had the opportunity of knowing, even slightly, the good
Colonel. Far from being a man who could easily be deceived, he might have deceived
others if he had been so disposed. But to me, who had the most favourable
opportunities of judging the President of the Theosophical Society, both in private and in
public, Colonel Olcott seemed to be as intelligent as he was honest and
good-natured. The theory of the delegate of the Psychical Research Society that he
too was a dupe in the hands of Madame Blavatsky was, therefore, ultimately rejected by me,
though, at the time the proceedings were published, I was carried away by the
superstitious veneration I then had for anything that came in the name of science.
But deeply as I now regret my conduct, I had been at the time not with, but against,
Madame Blavatsky. I, therefore, through a sense of shame, did not call on her for
some months after my arrival in England. But towards the end of my trip, I received
a letter from a female relation at Bombay, in which she said that Colonel Olcott had
called on her on his way to London, and had desired her to write to me to see him and
Madame Blavatsky. As I had heard that H.P.B. did not see visitors before evening, I
wrote to her inquiring if I could call at some other time, as I resided at some distance
from London, and was in a delicate state of health. I received the following reply:
---

"17, LANSDOWNE ROAD,
HOLLAND PARK, W., Tuesday.

"My Dearest Brother --- You were misinformed. Every evening, the year round,
I am visible after 6 P.M. You I will be delighted to see any day --
evening, morning, or twilight. Olcott is here, and you had better come as soon as
you can, so as to come at least twice before your departure. Do come, I
shall be so glad, my love for the benighted Hindus having been increasing these years in
proportion to your love for the civilsation and sciences of those accursed Europeans, the
symbol of every evil.

Yours ever fraternally and sincerely,
H.P. BLAVATSKY."

I visited Madame Blavatsky twice before my departure for India, which took place in
about a fortnight's time after the receipt of the above letter. Each time I
saw her I met with the most cordial reception at her hands. Though in consequence of
having taken the part of her calumniators I felt very awkward and degraded in her
presence, she did not for a moment refer to my conduct. I did not derive any
spiritual benefit by the interviews, as my mind was then unprepared for receiving
spiritual truths.

Shortly after my return to India, the publication of the "Secret Doctrine"
took place. The perusal of this book again awakened in me new interest in
Theosophy. Of all the wonderful acts attributed to Madame Blavatsky, this seemed to
me to be the most wonderful. There was not a department of science on which it did
not throw new light, and whatever might be said of the correctness of the teachings, there
could be no doubt that they were most varied and original. My opinion regarding
H.P.B. changed materially after I had finished reading the two thick volumes in which the
"Secret Doctrine" was given out to the world. The occult phenomena
performed by or through her might have been frauds, but there was no fraud in the writing
of this book, which challenged the examination and criticism of the literary world.
My admiration for H.P.B. knew no bounds, and I wrote to her stating what I thought of the
book. I received a most kindly reply through Mr. Bertram Keightley. Along with
his letter came the rules of the Esoteric (now called Eastern) Section of Theosophists,
and a copy of the book called "The Voice of the Silence." I was quite
charmed with the perusal of the latter, and sent in my application for enrollment as a
member of the Esoteric Branch. My application was granted. Shortly after, I
began to receive the "Instructions" for Esotericists, issued by Madame
Blavatsky. These "Instructions," which I now value most, appeared
too much like myths for a long time after I had received them, and so I left them
unread. The mind had become so wedded to the gross matter of the scientists, that I
could not conceive of such subtle matter as is dealt with in the
"Instructions." I can now, that my eyes have been opened to subtle matter,
understand why the teachings of the "Inner Section" are kept a secret. The
occult doctrines are far too transcendental to be realised as truths by the scientists
generally. A student of occultism must leave behind many preconceived notions
regarding the nature and constitution of "Man" and the "Universe"
before he can benefit by the "Instructions."